On Mon, 5 Apr 2004, Mark Hahn wrote:
>> We have a Linux Software RAID1 (mirroring). If there is a little
>> error on one of the disks (such a little error that the kernel dosn't
>> recognize it). There is a read request on the raid for a specific
>> file. The output of one of the disks differ from the output of the
>> other disk. (But there are no errors recognized by the kernel / fs /
>> raid-driver. Only one inverted bit for example) What is RAID/MD
>> doing? Are there checksums for the original file?
[...]
> then again, raid1 is a sort of ugly niche feature, IMO. how many
> systems can afford two but not three disks? raid5 is not scary!
*blink* Quite a few systems don't have the capacity for three-disk
rather than two-disk RAID. My laptop, for example, could not add a
third disk at all.
Also, RAID-5 does not have *any* improvement over RAID-1 in terms of
detecting this sort of single-disk unreported error.
RAID-5 also has a higher cost in terms of CPU use - enough that it
presents problems in a number of embedded system scenarios where RAID-1
is fine.
Three disk RAID-1, on the other hand, does allow you to detect a single
device failure by a "two to one vote" detection system...
Daniel
--
About the use of language: it is impossible to sharpen a pencil with a
blunt ax. It is equally vain to try to do it with ten blunt axes instead.
-- Edsger Dijkstra
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
